>>7898
Well done for eloquently putting it.
Of course concerns over hereditary weaknesses exist. It's been speculated that Prince William shot his love rival to a bloody mess with a shotgun and that the royal palace covered it up. It's up to you to decide whether as two become one flesh, an assault however invited by the wife is an assault upon the self upon which it's justifiable to react with such force, or if these are unkingly/unqueenly ways for royals to behave. I've seen fit to conclude that "Prince William is quietly based".
In any case it is my hope that little George is more than the sum of his parts. William will fear the jews ability to oust his guilty consciences to an unfeeling and unforgiving world and so this strategy goes on and on down the line. Get compromising details or information on them, then blackmail them accordingly. The same will happen to little George and to his kin.
The idea it's always easy to stir plebescian outrages is true but it's in the job description of a King to effectively handle these things. There's a two-fold threat offered by the rumblings of the plebes. The first threat comes from revolutionary figures appearing to have gained for themselves or even worse the group as a whole, the so-called "mandate of heaven". The way out is for the leaders of the rebellion to die not as martyrs but as a result of their own flaws and their own vices. Mandate of God in so doing leaves them.
The second threat comes from either foreign or your own domestic spooks with their drone technology and their bay of pigs psy operations. This one is relatively recent and evolving. It was not quite as easy in the 14th century to get that many bad actors that close to the King and his palace staff. The best answer I have is "go and get yourself a lot of legitimate sons". You can't afford to dwell with paranoia over what might drop out of the sky, or hide from every civic and public engagement.
My more eager concerns are how do I get from a parliamentary democracy back to the monarch being in charge of our country? First I might shrink the parliament down from 650, but it does not matter where you shrink it towards. You can say "150 or fewer is ideal", or "90 to 120 is ideal", or "two classrooms' worth is ideal" but it's not the number of them that corrupts the institution so much as the manner of their running. Originally this parliament sat once yearly to decide how the King's tax men were to behave in raising funds against an enemy realm. Looking at the modern state (literally "State" of it now) is appalling.
I must know how to get to there again and then I must know ways of addressing it in a plebescian way. Until then I think we are damned.
The furthest we can hope for out of our system is maybe a figure like Milei.